[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6DB0207B44@AcuExch.aculab.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 11:27:55 +0000
From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: 'Pan Xinhui' <xinhui.pan@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
"virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org"
<virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
"linux-s390@...r.kernel.org" <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
"xen-devel-request@...ts.xenproject.org"
<xen-devel-request@...ts.xenproject.org>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
CC: "kernellwp@...il.com" <kernellwp@...il.com>,
"jgross@...e.com" <jgross@...e.com>,
"rkrcmar@...hat.com" <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"will.deacon@....com" <will.deacon@....com>,
"borntraeger@...ibm.com" <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"paulus@...ba.org" <paulus@...ba.org>,
"pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"boqun.feng@...il.com" <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v5 9/9] Documentation: virtual: kvm: Support vcpu
preempted check
From: Pan Xinhui
> Sent: 20 October 2016 22:28
> Commit ("x86, kvm: support vcpu preempted check") add one field "__u8
> preempted" into struct kvm_steal_time. This field tells if one vcpu is
> running or not.
>
> It is zero if 1) some old KVM deos not support this filed. 2) the vcpu is
> preempted. Other values means the vcpu has been preempted.
>
> Signed-off-by: Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
> Documentation/virtual/kvm/msr.txt | 8 +++++++-
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/virtual/kvm/msr.txt b/Documentation/virtual/kvm/msr.txt
> index 2a71c8f..3376f13 100644
> --- a/Documentation/virtual/kvm/msr.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/virtual/kvm/msr.txt
> @@ -208,7 +208,8 @@ MSR_KVM_STEAL_TIME: 0x4b564d03
> __u64 steal;
> __u32 version;
> __u32 flags;
> - __u32 pad[12];
> + __u8 preempted;
> + __u32 pad[11];
> }
I think I'd be explicit about the 3 pad bytes you've left.
David
Powered by blists - more mailing lists